TERRAIN ANALYSIS and GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATIONSYSTEMS

VICTORIA M. BRUZESE

A Research Paper submitted to theDepartment of Geography in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for thedegree of Master of Science

June 1989

SECTION: PAGE

ODUION.1TERRMN ANALYSIS 1950 TO PSE.3

GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS ANDMTLITARY INFORMATION SYSTEMS ............................................................ 12

SYSTEMREVIEWS ........................................................................................... 16

MICROFIX ............................................................................................ 16

TERRABASE ......................................................................................... 19

CAMMS ................................................................................................. 21

CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 23

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 26

DEDICATION PAGE:

Most importantly to my Mom and Dad for being the wind beneath my wings.

This paper was also completed with a little help and encouragement from myfriends.

Thanks to all

INTRODUCTION

Terrain is an important factor in the integration of fire and maneuver. Sun

Tzu, a Chinese philosopher, recognized the importance of geographical

knowledge with its application toward successful military operations in his

writing The Art of War. In 514B.C. he wrote, for a commander to ignore the

topography of the battlefield was unacceptable for the execution of any

military operation. A commander was then only assured a fifty percent

probability of victory.

"And therefore I say: Know the enemy, know yourself;your victory will never be endangered. Know theground, know the weather, your victory will then betotal." (Sun Tzu 1982 p. 124).

The variety of maps required for doing battle has changed through time

with the technology of war. The evolution can be traced through balloon

observation, air-photography and radar to satellite sensors that have

paralleled the succession from black powder and smooth bores, through

cordite and rifling via bombers to guided rockets (O'Sullivan 1983).

In the nineteenth century generals could usually see the entire battlefield

that they fought over from a vantage point. Detailed topographic maps were

not required for tactics at this time (O'Sullivan 1983). Commanders could tell

their subordinates where to maneuver by pointing to terrain features that

they both could see. The twentieth century saw an increase in lethality and

range of guns that demanded accurate topographic maps. The dispersal of

units to avoid presenting concentrated targets meant that alter World War I

commanders above company level could no longer physically see their

battlefield and had to fight by map coordinates (Poole 1944).

The increased reach and destructiveness of weapons through this century

has induced not only an increase in troop dispersion but also a decrease in the

appropriate map scale. In World War! company and battalion commanders

used 1:25,000 scale maps (Jackman 1962). In World War II and Korea the

standard unit scale was 1:50,000 (Jackman 1962). In Vietnam, airmobile

company commanders were forced to use 1:250,000 scale maps because their

helicopters flew across the expanse covered by a 1:50,000 sheet before they

could figure where they were (O'Sullivan 1983).

Tactical decisions at divisional or lower levels require more detailed and

timely terrain information. It is necessary to determine fields of fire for

direct fire (line-of-sight) weapons, cover and concealment from enemy fire

and observation, the ease of off road movement for tactical vehicles and

landmarks for helicopter routes and landing zones (FM100-5 1984). An

artillery strike may convert a village crossroads into a tank trap of rubble, or

a readily penetrable forest into an instant abatis. The passage of a tank

company through an agricultural field may so chum the ground that it is

impossible for other tanks to follow.

The increasing importance of terrain characteristics and topographic maps

to military operations has made the impact of erroneous or out-of-date maps

potentially disastrous. Cultural features such as roads and the extent of the

built-up area, may change dramatically between map survey and map

printing. On a battlefield bridges disappear, dams are breached and buildings

reduced to rubble at a speed faster than the changes can be posted on existing

maps (O"Sullivan 1983). In Vietnam, the U.S. Forces used recent aerial photos

in place of maps for terrain analysis because of the rapidly changing face of

the landscapes in battle zones.

While recognizing that the "weather and terrain have more impact on

battle than any other physical factor, including weapons, equipment, or

supplies" (FM 100-5 1982), the U.S. Army has recognized that a manual

storage/retrieval system is not sufficient. Today's modem battlefield will

present more demands for meaningful terrain information that can be

collected, processed, and disseminated in a timely manner by a non-automated

system.

The purpose of this paper is to define terrain analysis, as it relates to

military applications; to review the historical development of the central ideas

of terrain analysis, which has led to the development of three computer

programs that are designed to make terrain analysis an automated process

rather than a manual process.

TERRAIN ANALYSIS: 1950 to PRESENT

Alter both world wars, a synthesis of physiograhic analysis began to

emerge under the title terrain analysis. The four sub-fields of military

geography; systematic, descriptive, topical, and regional, each contributed to

give the new subfield, terrain analysis, its foundation. Terrain analysis

employed the systematic sciences in order to collect and interpret

physiograhic information; descriptive military geography showed the critical

3

nature of terrain and validated the need for better prediction of terrain

influences; topical military geography gave specific applications for terrain

analysis in the fields of military doctrine, clothing, and equipment; and

finally,regional military geography formed the structure around which

terrain can be appreciated in its total geographic setting.

Although terrain analysis was used extensively during the Second World

War, most of the Army's experts left government service at the end of the war.

Post war geographic studies, for the most part, concentrated on developing

tactics, clothing, and equipment for the world's physiographic regions. This

included tactical operation manuals such as: airborne operations, guerrilla

operations, infiltration operations, barrier and denial operations, armor

operations, airmobile operations, snow and cold weather operations desert

operations, jungle operations, mountain operations, amphibious operations,

and military operations in urban terrain (this is not an exhaustive list by any

means).

Alter the war, the responsibility for gathering geographic information

and intelligence was vested with the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency

(DIA), and the Army's intelligence and topographic conununities. The role of

the CIA and DIA, arising out of the wartime agency Office of Strategic Services

(OSS), was largely in the realm of strategic, regional, and political geography,

while the Army concentrated most of its efforts into cartographic production

through the Army Map Service (AMS) with some geographic analysis done by

the Topographic and Military Intelligence Branches (Stone 1972).

An overview of the development of terrain analysis is provided in Figure 1.

4

U)

U)

.-

'I

'44,

1950s

1960s

1970s

1980s

Doctrine

Terrain Studieswith RegionalArea Emphasis

SystematicMilitaryGeography

Terrain Analysisas Combat Multiplier

IntelligencePreparation of theBattlefield (IPB)

Air Land Battle

Organization

Department ofDefense and ArmyLevel Staff

ResearchOrganizations andArmy Topographersin high levelEngineer andIntelligence Staffs

Defense MappingAgency

TopographicBattalions (TheaterArmy Level)

Terrain Teams atCorps and DivisionLevel

Hardware

Photo -Interpretation Kit

Quantitative Studies

Tactical ImageInterpretationFacility

Topographic SupportSystem(Development)

Zoom TransferScopes

TopographicSupport System(Fielded)

APP S MicroFixTerraBase CAMMSDTSS

C,)

(I)

'4'44,[-4

0

4,

E04,

4,

4,

0

4'

'44,

0

4,'4

bO..-I

x4

During the 1950's, terrain analysis was simply another component of the Army

intelligence community. Most studies were a carryover from the regional

emphasis of WWII. They were largely strategic in scope and were conducted

by higher level staffs within the Department of Defense. A good example of

this type of strategic terrain study occurred during the Korean conflict of the

early 1950's. Tomlinson (1967) discusses the strong dependence on precise

terrain information that resulted in General MacArthur's successful invasion

at Inchon. In order to gain approval of his risky invasion plan he had to

overcome the geographical criticisms from experts working for the Joint

Chief of Staff. MacArthur's plan was to arrive in the shallow waters of inchon

Harbor at a time which coincided precisely with one of the exceptionally high

tides. Such a landing would have been impossible on all but four dates during

the year in which the tide was high enough. Strategic surprise was achieved

because the North Korean People's Army did not consider such an invasion

route to be feasible. However, this type of analysis was done at the Anny staff

level.

Following the Korean War and into the 1960's, a great deal of theoretical

research in terrain analysis and methodology was done by Waterways

Experiment Station (WES), Vicksburg, Mississippi and by the Engineer

Topographic Laboratories (ETL), Ft. Belvoir, Virginia. Specific terrain studies

were done by the Army Map Service and Army Topographic staff elements, but

such studies were limited in scope and general usage. Although computers

were used extensively in research, the state-of the-art hardware which was in

the field at the time consisted of a collection of aerial photo interpretation

tools collectively known as the Tactical Imagery Interpretation Kits ('111K) and

5

the Tactical Imagery Interpretation Facility (TIIF). Furthermore, the Vietnam

War did not provide a definitive need for detailed terrain analysis:

understanding and using guerrilla tactics was perhaps more important than

analyzing the terrain; the tropical lowlands, rice paddies, and mountain

highlands were relatively consistent in terrain features; and the emphasis on

air warfare and the absence of tank warfare precluded a large demand for

terrain analysis.

However, it was not just the defense of Europe that provided the impetus for

increased emphasis and training in terrain analysis. The Arab-Israeli

conflicts of 1967 and 1973, with their high speed armor tactics and closely

coordinated air interdiction of airfields, were perhaps the most important

factors in impressing the military community with the necessity of a quick

response geographic and intelligence capability. Shoemaker (1968) describes

the quick success of the Israeli Air Force in the 1967 war as resulting in large

measure from the accurate intelligence information regarding the location of

the most vulnerable of United Arab Republic's airfields and aircraft.

The U.S. Army began the first steps to formalize its terrain analysis

program at a lower organizational level in the early 70's, partly because it was

recognized that NATO would never achieve tank for tank parity with Warsaw

Pact forces. Terrain intelligence was viewed as a force equalizer or combat

multiplier. Given good quality terrain intelligence which was both flexible,

continually updated, and rapidly retrievable, an outnumbered force could

expect to defend itself successfully. This was and still is the basic justification

for a tactical terrain analysis system. Definitive doctrinal and procedural

guides were published: FM 30-10 Military Geographic Intelligence (Terrain)

(1972), FM 2 1-33 Terrain Analysis(1978), and the ETL series of Terrain Analysis

Procedural Guides (begun in 1979). During this time period the concept

known as the Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB), was introduced.

IPB combined with terrain infonnation and other intelligence about the

enemy provides with reasonable accuracy an estimate of what routes and

courses of action the enemy may take.

The Defense Mapping Agency (DMA), established in 1972, became active

during the 1970's in developing a terrain analysis data base which could be

synthesized and manipulated by trained soldiers in order to produce

meaningful and useful terrain products for commanders. The result was the

production of DMA's Tactical Terrain Analysis Data Base (TFADB) at a scale of

1:50,000. Additionally, a planning data base was designed at 1:250,000.

These data bases consist of seven thematic overlays: 1) surface

configuration (slope), 2) vegetation, 3) surface materials (soils), 4) surface

drainage, 5) lines of communication (transportation), 6) obstacles, and 7)

water resources (FM 5-105 1985). The system was designed so that, given these

seven elements, an Army terrain analyst could produce a wide variety of

terrain intelligence products which would meet the commanders needs on the

battlefield, as depicted in Figure 2. Producing these overlays is a tedious

manual process of viewing aerial photographs in stereo, studying landlonn

patterns, making measurements, conducting field checks for ground truthing

if possible, and researching published materials (Figure 3). By combining

7

Synthesis Process

fp

(ONVfl4

LOPE

FROSTED

MYLRR

DYEC.OMPL.Ex

MP

Figure 2 (Messmore et al. 1979)

Military Aspects Exairle of Terrain

of_Terrain (OCOKA) Elements of Terrain Information Anavsis Product.

Observa t ion/

Fields of Fire

Vegetation (summer winter)

Surface configuration

Battlefield environmentaleffects on the terrain

Urban areas

Cover and Vegetation (summer winter)

Concealment Surface configurationObstacles (micro relief)

Battlefield environmentaleffects on terrain

Urban areas

Obstacles Vegetation (summer winter)

Surface configurationDrainage characteristicsNatural and man-made

Micro reliefSurface materials (vet & dry)

Urban areas

o Nor i..cntal line-of-sightfor .irect-f ire weapons

arid :..dar.

o Eripcement suitabilityand performance ratingsfor ground surveillance

o Cover totential from

direct aria indirect fire

(good/fair/poor).o Concealment potential from

horizontal and verticalobservat ions (goodlfair/

poor).

o Location of existingnatural and man-aide

obstacles.

o Mobility potential on the

battlefield expressed inGO, SLOW-GO and NO GO for

track and wheeled vehicles.

Key Terrain Urban areas o Location of natural and

Lines of communication man-made futures as key

Surface configuration terrain such as landslide

Drainage characteristics area., bridges, check-points, high ground, andkey military installations.

Avenues of Vegetation (sir winter)

Approach Urban areasSurface configurationSurface materials (vet 1 dry)

Drainage characteristicsLines of cunication

Figure 3 (FM 5-105 1985)

o Identification of areas

where movement of friendlyand enemy forces may occur.

o Speed prediction.

information from one or more of these overlays with weather data and the

operational parameters of tactical equipment, the terrain analyst provides the

commander with an analysis of the effects of terrain and weather on

contemplated operations.

During the 1970's these terrain data bases were introduced into the Army's

topographic battalion's at the Theater Army level. Later in the decade, terrain

teams were formed in support of each Combat Corps and Division. At this same

time, equipment to assist analysis and synthesis of terrain in formation and to

support the hard copy output of these terrain teams was assembled and placed

in specially designed air-conditioned trailer modules. When this author

attended the Mapping, Charting, and Geodetic Officer's Course in 1981, the

prototypes of the Topographic Support System (TSS) were shown as the

state-of-the-art terrain analysis hardware. However, TSS was delayed in its

fielding to topographic battalions (due largely to budget cuts) until 1985, when

the majority of the equipment within these modules was considered obsolete.

Terrain and weather, while presenting equal faces to both sides in a

conflict, gives the advantage to the side which is able to gather and utilize the

most military geographical infonnation. The advantage goes to the side which

can anticipate the effects of weather, reinforce natural terrain obstacles to its

benefit, and anticipate the enemy's action based on geographic constraints.

The next battles will move fast. With each new situation, timely terrain

intelligence products which are able to meet the tactical commander's

demands will make the difference in who wins the battles and ultimately the

war. Additionally, a key element of any terrain analysis system in the future

will be the capability to quickly analyze lines of sight over large distances

and display areas which are masked from line of sight intervisibility from a

given observation point.

The terrain analysis system in use in the Army today is half a manual

system and half an automated system. The drawbacks for not being completely

automated are 1) data bases (previously mentioned) are neither complete nor

fielded to the appropriate topographic unit, 2) lack of trained personnel and 3)

maintenance and logistic problems. As such, the process is slow when

compared to a complete computer based geographic information system in use

throughout state and federal agencies today. Factors such as data base

construction and analysis costs, hardware costs, budget priorities, or the need

for human involvement in the synthesis process may also be pertinent. In

order to better understand the computer programs/systems that have been

developed and fielded and that are still being tailored, the manual terrain

analysis system will be examined. This will be followed by a discussion of the

capabilities of TerraBase, a microcomputer-based military terrain information

system which many terrain teams are now using. Next Microfix v2.2, the first

microcomputer-based terrain system fielded in the Army; followed by a

description of the Condensed Army Mobility Model System (CAMMS).

A specific request from a military commander begins the synthesis of a

terrain product for either the manual terrain analysis system or for any of the

automated terrain analysis systems. However, in the manual system, the

terrain analyst pulls the appropriate thematic overlays and other data from

his storage files, synthesizes the required information by placing the overlays

on top of each other and manipulating the associated data (as well as

synthesizing the data), and then manually traces out the finished product.

Aerial photographs may be consulted if available. This system has great

flexibility in that a product can be specially tailored to meet exact the needs

and specifications of the user. An overhead concealment product could be

produced for any season of the year using knowledge of the deciduous nature

of trees. A cross-country movement (CCM) graphic could be made for wet or

dry conditions; for wheeled or tracked vehicles and so on. But the severe

drawback of this method is the time consuming manual construction. A CCM

product could take considerably longer, up to 30 hours, depending on the

complexity of the area and the expertise of the terrain analyst (the time

estimate is based on first hand knowledge from being a member of a theater

terrain team and as a commander of a cartographic company). The 30 hours

do not take into consideration press time for multiple copies.

The terrain analysis system does work, despite the slow response time and

the cumbersome data base overlays that must be stored. However, something is

better than nothing. For example, in the Granada operation, a 24 hour notice

was served to the topographic battalion that this author was in, for multiple

copies of the famed tourist map. The result was a monochrome copy with a

military grid overlay, so that targets could be located for artillery fire

missions. In defensive situations such as the U.S. role in Korea and the NATO

defense of Europe, the need for rapid response time is mollified by the need for

advance defense planning and war gaming over known terrain. Terrain

studies and CCM products can be produced for likely battlefields well in

advance.

10

The aforementioned advantages of the present Army terrain analysis

system have arisen in part from the organizational structure the Army has

chosen to utilize. In contrast to the geographers of World War II who

conducted studies in Washington D.C., to aid in the strategic planning at the

Pentagon, today's terrain analyst belongs to a Terrain Team at the Theater

Army, Corps, and Division level. At this level, terrain information is both

more accessible and more responsive to the tactical needs of commanders of

Division, Brigades, Battalions, and Companies. Much of the quality and

flexibility of the terrain products depends on the subjective understanding

and decisions of the personnel on the terrain team.

In short, the primary advantages of the present Army terrain analysis

system are its flexibility, responsiveness to use?s needs, and its ability to

produce accurate meaningful terrain intelligence. The primary disadvantages

are its slow response time (relative to wartime response needs), and to a lesser

degree, the cumbersome nature of its database overlays.

11

A geographic information system (GIS) is a powerful tool for collecting,

storing, retrieving at will, transforming, and displaying spatial data from the

real world for a particular set of purposes (Burrough 1988). A GIS describes

objects from the real world in terms of 1) position with respect to a known

coordinate system, 2) attributes that are unrelated to position, and spatial

interrelations with each other, which describes how they are linked together

or how one can travel between them.

This history of using computers for mapping and spatial analysis shows that

there have been parallel developments in automated data capture, data

analysis, and presentation in several broadly related fields (Burrough 1988).

These fields include topographical mapping and cartography, surveying and

photograznmetiy, rural and urban planning, soil science, geography, and

remote sensing and image analysis. Military applications have overlapped and

even dominated several of these fields. Consequently, there has been much

duplication of effort and a multiplication of field specific jargon for different

applications for different purposes. This multiplicity of effort in several

initially separate but closely related fields is now resulting in the possibility of

linking many kinds of spatial data processing together into truly general

purpose geographical information systems, as technical and conceptual

problems are overcome (Burrough 1988).

However, a GIS should be thought of as being much more than a means of

coding, storing, and retrieving data about characteristics of the earth's

12

surface. In a real sense the data in a GIS, whether they have been hard copied

on a sheet of paper or as invisible marks on the surface of a magnetic tape,

should be thought as representing a dynamic model of the real world

(Burrough 1988). These data can be accessed, transformed, and manipulated

interactively in a GIS; and can serve as a model for studying environmental

processes or for analyzing the results of trends, or anticipating the possible

results of planning decisions.

Geographic information systems differ from computer graphics because the

latter are largely concerned with the display of an image. However, good

computer graphics are essential to a modem geographic information system

but a graphics package is not by itself sufficient for performing tasks

expected (Burrough 1988).

A GIS does not differ from a military information system (MIS), except that

the applications of a MIS are military oriented. So, the following discussion on

what a GIS should be able to do, as well as, operative and functional criteria

can be applied to the three military information systems mentioned earlier,

and in fact will be used to review each. Operative criteria refers to the general

hardware! software characteristics of a system. Functional criteria deal with

four components: data capture, editing, analysis, and output.

Data input covers all aspects of transforming data captured in the form of

existing maps, field observations, and sensors (including aerial photography,

satellites, and recording instruments) into a compatible digital form. The

creation of a clean, digital database is a most important and complex task upon

13

which the usefulness of the GIS depends. It is the ability to process the

cartographic features in terms of their spatial and non-spatial attributes that

is the main distinguishing criterion between automated cartography (where

the non-spatial data relate mainly to color, line type, and symbolism) and

geographic information processing (where the non-spatial data may record

land use, soil properties, vegetation types, and slope aspect).

There is no single method of entering the spatial data to a GIS. The choice of

method is governed largely by application, budget, and the type of data being

input (Burrough 1988). The types of data encountered are existing maps,

including field notes and hand drawn documents, aerial photographs,

remotely sensed data from satellite or airborne scanners and point sample data

(i.e. soil profiles). In addition, the actual method of data input is also

dependent on the structure of the database of the GIS, raster or vector.

The raster and vector methods for spatial data structures are distinctly

different approaches to modeling geographical information. Raster data

structures consist of an array of grid cells. Each grid cell is referenced by a

row and column number and it contains a number representing the type or

value of the attribute being mapped.

Vector data structures consist of three main geographical entities, points,

lines, and areas: points are similar to cells, except that they do not cover areas;

lines and areas are sets of interconnected coordinates that can be linked to

given attributes (Burrough 1988). Figure 4 gives a graphic comparison of

raster and vector structures; and Table 1, from Burrough (1988) lists the

14

uaunuai

oDnunaII9UflBflUI3IIUBUU!3IIBRØUGW

mat.

(a) (b)

A chair in (a) raster or grid-Il and (b) vector for-

Figure 4 (Burrough 1988)

Comparison of vector and raster methods

Vector methods

AdvantagesGood representation of phenomenological data structureCompact data structureTopology can be completely described with networklinkagesAccurate graphicsRetrieval, updating and generalization of graphics andattributes are possible

DisadvantagesComplex data structuresCombination of several vector polygon maps or polygonand raster maps through overlay creates difficultiesSimulation is difficult because each unit has a differenttopological formDisplay and plotting can be expensive, particularly for highquality, colour and cross-hatchingThe technology is expensive, particularly for the moresophisticated software and hardwareSpatial analysis and filtering within polygons arc impos-sible

Raster methods

AdvantagesSimple data structuresThe overlay and combination of mapped data withremotely sensed data is easyVarious kinds of spatial analysis are easySimulation is easy because each spatial unit has the same

size and shapeThe technology is cheap and is being energeticallydeveloped

DisadvantagesVolumesof graphic dataThe use of large cells to reduce data volumes means thatphenomenologically recognizable structures can be lost andthere can be a serious loss of informationCrude rutcr maps are considerably less bc.asilW thanmaps drawn with fine linesNetwork linkages are difficult to establishProjection transformation ale time consuming unlessspecial algorithms or hardware are used.

Table 1 (Burrough 1988)

advantages and disadvantages of the two methods.

Data transformation includes editing and updating and the large array of

analysis methods that can be applied to the data in order to obtain answers to

the questions asked of the GIS.

Computer analysis of data is the primaiy function of a GIS. When a GIS is

designed, the designer should expect that a user/customer will want to ask an

unlimited number of questions. So, the GIS should be capable of answering

them by using certain combinations of data retrieval and transformation

operations. Even though there are questions that will not be anticipated,

listed from Burrough (1988), are some general questions that a GIS should be

capable of answering:

a) Where is object A?

b) Where is A in relation to place B?

c) How many occurrences of type A are there within distance D of B?

d) What is the value of function Z at position X?

e) How large is B (area, perimeter etc.)?

1) Reclassify objects having certain combinations of attributes.

g) Using the digital database as a model of the real world, simulate the effect of

process P over time T for a given scenario S.

Data output and presentation concerns the ways the data are displayed and

the results of analysis are reported. A variety of output products can be

produced by a GIS: maps, graphs, charts, and reports. Output devices are many:

line printers, fixed carriage typewriters, drum and flatbed plotters,

electrostatic printers and/or cathode ray tube (CRT) terminals. The variety of

15

output devices is rapidly increasing: i.e., color xerography. Maps are probably

the most demanded item from a GIS. While manipulation techniques are

sophisticated, mapped output remains fairly rudimentaiy, although higher

standards are being implemented.

SYSTEM REVIEWS

The purpose of this system review is to provide a general impression of

systems that have been designed specifically for terrain analysis, their

characteristics, and their limitations. This review is by no means an

exhaustive inventory, considering these systems are continually being

updated/developed as user feedback reaches those the developers; and this

report will not attempt to make a judgment on which system is the best.

However, the author will offer a suggestion of unity of effort in the

conclusion section.

The materials reviewed here were obtained from Major Claric K. Ray Jr. of

the United States Military Academy, Major Monte Pearson, of the Waterways

Experiment Station, and W03 Nonn Price of the Defense Mapping School.

MICROFIX

The MicroFix (QRC-55) was the first microcomputer information system

fielded to Army topographic battalions. The system is simply a hard cased

Apple II computer with a 20 mb hard disk drive and a videodisk player.

Version 2.2, now called the MicroFix Topographic Workstation, provides the

terrain analyst with an automated capability to determine the effects of the

16

terrain and weather on the battlefield.

The V2.2 MicroFix Topographic Workstation contains two parts: a baseline

configuration common to all MicroFix systems and the topographic package.

The baseline software maintains graphic and text data bases that can be

overlaid on maps stored on the system's video disk unit. The topographic

package represents a cooperative effort among Army laboratories and units.

The main menu of MicroFix contains the following: Digital Terrain

Mapping, Weather/Environment, Mobility Calculator, Unit Conversions, and

Coordinate Conversions.

The Digital Terrain Mapping (DTM) software provides digital topographic

support. This program uses Digital Terrain Elevation Data (DTED) Level I

produced by the Defense Mapping Agency (DMA) which have been

reformatted for use with MicroFix. DTM can draw and print the following

types of output: contour maps, tinted elevation, slope, and speed maps, visible

area plots for intervisibility on the ground or low flying aircraft or at

constant elevation, line-of- sight profiles, oblique views and perspective

views. Map images may be overlain in any combination and completed maps

may be overlain with UTM ticks, numbered ticks, or a grid. Images may be

stored on the hard disk, and then recalled to the screen for later use.

The Mobility Calculator is a MicroFix application that allows the user to

perform predictions of the speed at which any of a number of standard US and

Warsaw Pact vehicles can negotiate different types of terrain.

17

The user specifies the scenario by making several menu choices. The

Mobility Calculator uses two different models to predict speeds, usually

producing two answers.

Each model has its strengths and weaknesses, and the analyst must determine

which is most appropriate for a given situation.

The Condensed Army Mobility Model (CAMM) developed by the Waterways

Experiment Station calculates foites on the vehicle as closely as possible and

therefore tends to be veiy accurate (Forscom Manual 1987). To obtain these

more accurate results, however, the model requires detailed information about

the terrain.

The Defense Mapping Agency Cross Country Mobility Model (DMACCMM) is

designed to be a manual method. It is simpler and requires less information,

therefore, the results are less accurate than CAMM. In addition, some vehicles

supported by CAMM are not included in DMACCMM. An advantage of the

DMACCMM is that it considers obstacles and the current version of the CAMM

does not (Forscom Manual 1987).

The unit and coordinate conversion options simply lets the user change the

parameters the user is operating in (e.g., feet to meters or UTM coordinates to

Latitude/Longitude).

While MicroFix has filled a critical gap in the Army's terrain analysis

program, it is not a comprehensive digital terrain analysis system. The digital

data stored by MicroFix contain only the feature infonnation regarding

specific locations. It does not have the capacity to store large files of digital

data as required by a full geographic information system.

TERRABASE

TerraBase, is described as "what a word processor is to text, TerraBase is to

terrain" (TerraBase User's Docwnentation 198 8,pg. 1), a microcomputer

military information system that uses many featuis of current geographic

inlonnation systems, tailored for use by terrain analyst in the field. This

system is completely user-oriented and requires little or no familiarity with

computers.

TerraBase was designed to run on the Zenith 248 microcomputer and

Epson-compatible Alps America printer. The minimum configuration is:1)

Zenith 248 with 20 mb hard disk drive (or any IBM-AT compatible with 512k

memoty and EGA), 2) Zenith color monitor (or any EGA-RGB monitor), 3) Alps

printer (or any Epson FX compatible) (TerraBase User Documentation 1988).

The SummaSketch graphic input tablet device is used to enter geographical

information from 'TTADBs and maps or photos. TerraBase also supports the

Emerald DOS 80-8000, a 9 track tape drive. This tape drive can be used to bring

into the system DTED level I and Landsat Thematic Mapper tapes recorded in

ASCII standard 1600 bits per inch format as provided by the Defense Mapping

Agency (TerraBase User Documentation 1988). Finally, if color output is

desired, the software supports the Alps 318 and Epson EX 800 and 1000 printers,

19

which still can do black and white copies, but can also provide maps with up to

16 shades.

The forms of data supported by TerraBase are Digital Terrain Elevation Data

(DTED) Level I, Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) data, Tactical Terrain Analysis

Database (iTAD) factor overlays (digitized by the user), and Point/Area/Linear

(PAL) Feature Data taken from maps and overlays. Figure 6 shows the products

that TerraBase is capable of producing. TerraBase's main menu consists of

three selections: 1) Data Importers, 2) Digital Terrain Mapping, and 3) Utilities.

The Data Importers section loads the different types of data used by the

system. Most of Terrabase uses raster data, with elements of information

arranged in an uniform grid over the terrain. TerraBase PAL Data are not

raster, but are vector data.

Digital Terrain Mapping uses the imported data for analysis and production.

DTED is used to produce elevation layers, such as contour, slope, and visible

area maps. It is also used for non-layer data sets, such as perspective, oblique,

line-of-sight, and dynamic parallel views. Landsat layers can depict

supervised classifications of Landsat data with tints indicating categories such

as vegetation, urban, and water. Tactical Terrain Analysis Data Base (TFADB)

layers produced from TTADB factor overlays are tinted according to

cross-country mobility or user-specified criteria. Point/Area/Linear (PAL)

layers contain special features digitized from maps or photographs and stored

in the digital data base. Products may be layered, stored for future recall, or

printed in black and white or color.

20

Utilities support useful functions not directly related to the terrain data.

The Graphic Screen Utility allows users to recall and print images stored

earlier. The Mobility Calculator determines the speed of cross-country travel

for various U.S. and Warsaw Pact vehicles, using CAMM and DMA's

cross-country model, based on given terrain conditions at a point. Coordinate

Conversions translate UTM coordinates to latitude/longitude and vice versa.

Sunrise/Sunset/Moon Phase software provides almanac data, and the historical

climatology function interactively retrieves data from a weather database for

four areas of the world (West Germany, Korea, Middle East and Central

America). The Aircraft Load package calculates how density altitude affects

load lift capacity for certain fixed wing and rotaiy wing aircraft. Units

conversion automates the conversion of units of measure. The Printer Pattern

Editor allows the user to modify the patterns used to represent screen tints in

printed products. The Configuration Editor allows the user to set system wide

defaults to tailor TerraBase to the particular computer and peripherals in use.

CONDENSED ARMY MOBILITY MODEL SYSTEMS (CAMMS)

CAMMS provides a comprehensive description of the ability of vehicles and

vehicle convoys to transport soldiers and material over virtually any type of

terrain, on-road or off-mad, under nearly any weather conditions. First

generations of the CAMMS were developed in the early 1980's to provide a

predicting capability for microcomputer systems such as the Apple II (i.e.

MicroFix), which existed at the time. Today, CAMMS equipment requirements

are as follows: 1) Zenith 248 or compatible that nins DOS version 3.2 or later, 2)

math coprocessor, 3) EGA monitor, 4) at least a 20 mb hard disk drive, 5) Alps

21

P2000G printer or any wide carriage Epson, and 6) SuznmaSketch digitizer

tablet (optional).

CAMMS version 2.0 requires that the terrain data be provided in specific

digital fonnat. No provision for terrain map data preparation is provided in

the system. Data processing done with CAMMS always includes and is limited to

the specific map area provided in the data base. There are no GIS functions

(i.e., to extract, overlay, or combine map data) provided with CAMMS. Zoom

and pan of output display is provided but the area represented and content of

the actual map data cannot be altered on CAMMS.

Products from CAMMS include (CAMMS user manual):

1) Soil Moisture Map (based on precipitation data)- shows area distribution of

soil moisture based on historical weather data.

2) Terrain Factor Map- shows values of factors that strongly influence

off-road ground speed- i.e slope, strength, surface roughness, vegetation

spacing, and driver visibility.

3) Off-road Speed Map- shows speed for one or a mix of vehicles within a given

terrain area and for a user-defined weather condition.

4) Off-road Reason Map- shows major reasons for speed limitations for a

specified vehicle type within a given terrain area and for a user defined

weather situation.

5) Off-road Difference Map- compares the off road speeds of the two user

selected vehicle types within a terrain area and for a user defined weather

situation.

22

Output and display consists of colored patch maps (for off-road data) and

colored lines (for on-mad) with the colors representing various selected

terrain and prediction attributes.

The CAMMS system provides the powerful capability of analyzing the

terrain's effect on mobility interactively for any combination of vehicles,

terrain conditions, weather conditions, and operating scenarios, as a result,

the terrain analyst has an infinite number of mobility "maps" available for

use. CAMMS provides the simultaneous evaluation of on-road, off-road, and

gap-crossing operations; coupled with the ability to incorporate weather

conditions.

CONCLUSION

The focus of this paper has been in the historical setting through which

military geography and terrain analysis have developed. Conflicts in the 50's

and 60's helped to develop the Army's terrain analysis doctrine in the concept

of terrain intelligence as a multiplier of combat power. Military laboratories,

established since World War II, became actively involved in the quantitative

aspects of military geography. When it was realized that terrain factors could

be modeled and predicted with reasonable accuracy, the present Army terrain

analysis program began. These concepts evolved through the 1970's until in

the 80's the Army's terrain analysis was organized into units which are close

to their principal customers/users: namely the tactical/maneuver

commanders. The terrain products which are produced by these Terrain

Teams are flexible and responsive to user's needs. However, it suffers from

one major flaw: it is too slow.

23

Tomorrow's battlefield will be fast and constantly changing. As Sun Tzu

wrote centuries ago:Conformation of the ground is of the greatestassistance in battle. Therefore, to estimate the enemysituation and to calculate distances and the degrees ofdifficulty of the terrain so as to control victory arevirtues of the superior general. He who fights withfull knowledge of these factors is certain to win;hewho does not will surely be defeated. (Sun Tzu p128).

Army terrain analysis must be fast and flexible; computer assisted terrain

analysis will be the key to meeting these needs. However, the terrain analyst

must have manual backup capabilities when the computer fails.

MicroFix has demonstrated how vital computer assistance can be.

TerraBase, the logical successor to MicroFix, can take terrain analysis further

toward clear, fast, and accurate terrain products; and CAMMS, a sub-system for

MicroFix and TerraBase, is needed by terrain teams who are already computer

literate and understand the manipulation of digital data.

All of the researeh done so far have made tremendous contributions to the

field of terrain analysis. However, the efforts have been of individual

agencies and not a unified one. Agencies fmd themselves "competing" against

each other to become the standard for the field and for funds. Enough

research has been done, that it is time now for an unified effort to take place.

This author believes that it is now time to unify all efforts under one agency

(and funds) and set standards and priorities towards a standardized digital data

base. The one agency in charge must incorporate the efforts from the others

such as, United States Military Academy, the Waterways Experiment Station and

24

the Engineer Topographic Laboratories; and it must also interface with

probably the most important factor (and probably the most forgotten), the

units in the field. In the field is where the real test of a system is

accomplished.

The other suggestion or warning that this author would like to offer is that

the terrain analyst must continue to be taught from a geographic base and not

a computer science one. The terrain analyst of the future should not only be a

keyboard operator, he must understand the factors of slope, vegetation, soils,

surface drainage, lines of communication, obstacles, and water resources. The

terrain analyst must know their effects combined and their importance

separately. The human element in the terrain analysis process has been

validated historically. Computers cannot replace the common sense approach

of a well trained terrain analysis team. Computer algorithms cannot

accomplish the many subjective decisions and explanations required in most

terrain analysis. The exception to the "rules" that are not contained in the

data base could spell disaster on the battlefield without the human intelligence

to modify or qualify the synthesized results.

25

Ackerman, Edward A. 1945. "Geographic Training, Wartime Research andImmediate Professional Objectives." Annals ofthe Association of

American Geographers , 35 (December):121-143.

Birdseye, Claude H. 1940. "Stereoscopic Photographic Mapping." Annals ofthe American Geographers, 30 (March):77-82.

Blouet,W. Brain.ed, 1981. The Origins ofAcademic Geography in the UnitedStates. The Shoe String Press.

Burrough,P.A. 1988. Principles ofgeographical i,formation systems for landresources assessment. Oxford science Publications. 194 p.

Bryan, Kirk. 1944. "Physical Geography in the Training of the Geographer."Annals ofthe Association ofAmerican Geographers., 34 (March):183-189.

Durch, William J. 1984. National Interests and the Military Use ofSpace.Ballinger Publishing Company.

Estes, John E. and Leslie W. Senger. 1974. Remote Sensing: Techniques forEnvironmental Analysis. Hamilton Publishing Company.

Gregory, K.J. 1985. The Nature ofPhysical Geography. Edward Arnold Press.

High, James. 1963 "A Reappraisal of Terrain Appreciation." The ProfessionalGeographer .,15 (January):11-16.

Holt-Jensen, Anid. 1985. Geography: Its History and Concepts. Harper andRow.

Honeycuu, Dale M., Kristina M. Brooks, and A. Jon Kimerling. 1980. GeographicInfor,nation Systems: A review ofselected operational and functionalcapabilities. Geography Department, Oregon State University (January).72p.

Jackman, Albert H. 1962. "The Nature of Military Geography." The ProfessionalGeographer., 14 (January):7-13.

26

James, Preston E. and Clarence F. Jones. 1954. American Geography: Inventoryand Prospect. Syracuse University Press.

and Geoffrey J. Martin. 1981. All Possible Worlds: A History of

Geographical Ideas. John Wiley and Sons.

Lee, Willis T. 1946. "Airplanes and Geography." The Geographical Review 10(November):3 10-325.

Messmore, Jeffrey A., Theodore C. Vogel, and Alexander R. Pearson. 1979.Terrain analysis procedural guide for vegetation (Report No.1 in the ETh

series on guides for Army terrain analysts). ETL-0178 (March). U.S. ArmyCorps of Engineers Engineer Topographic Laboratories, Ft. Belvoir, Va. 208 p.

Moffit, Fred H. 1946. "The Method of Aerophotographic Mapping." TheGeographical Review 10 (November):326-336.

Monmonier, Mark S. 1985. Technological Transition in Cartography. TheUniversity of Wisconsin Press.

O'Sullivan, Patrick and Jesse W. Miller. 1983. The geography ofwarfare. St.Martin's Press, New York. 172 p.

Poole, Sidman P. 1944. "The Training of the Militaiy Geographer." Annals of

the Association ofAmerican Geographers 34 (March):202-206.

Reed, Harrison P. 1946. "The Development of the Terrain Model in War." TheGeographical Review 36 (October).

Reeves, Robert G.,ed, 1975. Manual ofRemote Sensing. American Society ofPhotogrammetry.

Shoemaker, M.G.R.L. 1968. The Arab-Israeli war. Military Review. 48(Aug) p.57-69.

Tomlinson, H.Pat. 1967. Inchon: the General's decision. Military Review.47(Apr) p.28-35.

U.S. Army. 1917. Topography, map reading and reconnaissance (Corps of

27

Engineers). GPO. Washington D.C. l5lp.

U.S. Army. 1972. Military geographic intelligence (terrain). Field Manual30-10.

Washington D.C. 258 p.

U.S. Army. 1978. Terrain Analysis. Field Manual 21-33. Washington D.C. ll4.p.

U.S. Army. 1979. Remote sensing applications guide; Part 2, Technicalguidance. Engineer Pamphlet 70-1-1, October. Chief of Engineers,Washington D. C. 273 p.

U.S. Army. 1982. Military operations. Field Manual 100-5. Washington D.C.

U.S. Army. 1982. Airland battle 2000. Headquarters, U.S. Army Training andDoctrine Command, Ft. Monroe, Va. 274 p.

U.S.Army. 1985. Condensed Army mobility model system (CAMMS V.1.4) U.SArmy Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station GeotechnicalLaboratories Mobility Systems, Vicksburg, Ms. 31 p.

U.S. Army. 1985. Topographic operations. Field Manual 5-105. U.S. ArmyEngineer School, Ft. Belvoir, Va.

U.S. Army. 1987. MicroFix (V.22) Topographic Workstation Annex. FORSCOMManual 380-lA. Department of Geography and Computer Science, UnitedStates Military Academy, West Point, New York. 150 p.

U.S. Army. 1988. TerraBase: Military Terrain Information System User'sDocwnentation. Department of Geography and Computer Science, UnitedStates Military Academy, West Point, New York. 152 p.

"War, Peace, and Geography. .An Editorial Foreword." Annals of theAssociation ofAmerican Geographers 31 (June 1941):77-82.

Zi-Chang, Tang. Principles ofConflict: Recompilation and New EnglishTranslation with Annotation on Sun Tzu's Art ofWar. T.C. Press, 1969.

29